About your Search

20120925
20121003
STATION
CNN 1
CNNW 1
FBC 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
MSNBC 1
MSNBCW 1
WRC (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 22
Search Results 0 to 21 of about 22 (some duplicates have been removed)
saying the administration's response was inept and ignorant and susan rice blaming it on a spontaneous protest was inexcusable. >> it's either willful ignorance or abysmal ignorance to think people come to spontaneous demonstrations with mortars and heavy weapons pant attack goes on for hours. bill: both sides are complaining. governor romney's team says the white house is still getting its story mixed up. >> reporter: democrats say republicans are politicizing the tragic attack that cost of life of four americans. the republicans say the white house is cover ugging up the details for political reasons. here is axlerod. >> the president called it an act of terror the day after it happened. but when you are the responsible party, when you are the administration and you have a responsibility to act on what you know and what the intelligence community believed. >> reporter: actually it was several days after the benghazi attack before the white house called it terrorism and that came after the national terrorism chief called it aterror attack. >> i think now based on the recommendations o
.s. ambassador to the united nations, susan rice. this is all over the way the white house responded to the deatdeaths of those four americs killed at our u.s. consulate in libya. fresh fallout tonight. congressman peter king, republican from new york, heads the powerful house homeland security committee, saying rice must step down because the account she gave in the days and hours following the attack was plain wrong. here he is earlier today on fox. >> either ambassador was deliberately misleading the american people or she showed and demonstrated such a lack of mr. king says several people with the administration. so did the intelligence change, then, days after the attack, or what? >> well, as you said, fox news has sources that say intelligence officials knew within a day, one day, that it was a terror attack. a spokesman for the director of national intelligence, though, says the information about the attack did evolve over time, but didn't say how long it took. ambassador rice spoke five days after the attack, and congressman king says at >> growing concerns over possible vote
that ambassador susan rice should resign because of her statement. >>> all right, we want to turn to andrea mitchell, chief foreign correspondent, and andrea how rare is it for the intelligence committee to come out and acknowledge they got it wrong initially, and is it having any effect on the response here? >> reporter: well, first of all it is very, very rare for them to make this type of admission. and politics are clearly in play. the questions are being asked, why did they get it wrong? was it because of a coverup, or was it because they were trying to avoid acknowledging mistakes this close to the election? so there is always a political consequence, and certainly's tonight, the white house is strongly defending susan rice, but she is in the cross-hairs of the political argument and that will be pursued by the republicans who have been hammering away for days saying that the administration deliberately covered up. something the white houses strongly denying. >>> all right, andrea mitchell, thank you, we want to let you know about a special broadcast in the works for monday. brian wil
it gets susan rice off the hook. peter king is calling for her to resign. does that get her off the hook for coming out five days after this happened on five different sunday shows and saying this was spontaneous protest related to this film. i don't think so. we all know what james clapper's office said. we know that they have been evolving on this. but it took five days. >> not only that what she said was unequivocal. why not just say the safest thing that all administration say when they don't want to release information which is the investigation is continuing. we don't have all the information. >> why jump to the conclusion that this is about a film and each at the president's u.n. speech this week he highlighted this film through throughout this u.n. speech leading many to believe that the main issue is this youtube clip that seems relatively insignificant in the grand scheme of siblings charles krauthammer also had a similar take on this and he responded to that james clapper statement last night. take a listen. >> well, you read the dni -- dnr statement it's a cover your rump sta
to the united nations susan rice had said earlier it was a spontaneous attack over an anti-muslim film and that there were no extremists involved, but now with the new information, new york congressman peter king is calling for rice to step down. here's what he told our wolf blitzer. >> too much things to go wrong and everyone forgets about it the next day. i think we have to send a clear message and on such a flight issue as this, an american ambassador was killed and by all the accumulation of evidence at the time the prezumption had to be it was terrorism. i can see why they wanted to say it's too early to say it's definitively terrorism but to rule out terrorism and say it was not terrorism at that time, to me, was a terrible mistake to make whether it was intentionally or unintentionally. i believe she should resign, yes. >> the white house is standing by rice at her statements were based on information they had at the time. and it was not intended to mislead people. according to white house officials. >>> now to the crisis in syria. the u.s. is warning iran to stop providing arms
nations ambassador susan rice to resign. chief intelligence correspondent catherine herridge live in washington with more on that. >> reporter: thank you, gregg and good morning. a congressional source confirming to fox news that uav assets were quote, repositioned to establish better situational awareness on the ground and monitor at least two suspects training sites in eastern libya known to be used by foreign fighters. we're learning more details about the attack itself. the compound was reportedly assaulted on three sides with use of heavy weapons as fox was first to report, there were two waves to the attack strongly suspected inside information specifically use of mortars which hit consulate building and annex a mile away. here is republican senator bob corker this morning. they are demanding specific communications between ambassador stevens and the state department. >> at a time most americans would want to rally around our country at the death of four americans serving our country instead we've had this bizarre response which only leads me to believe, number one, there wa
it was preplanned within 24 hours after the death of the ambassador. yet susan rice, jay cancer oh, several obama officials going out saying it was a response to the movie. is this a cover-up? >> they lie. there is no question about it. by the way, if the republicans did that, there would be hell to pay. everybody would call for resignations and it would be terrible. but they lie. everybody knew they were lying. they knew almost immediately because it was obviously an attack. this had nothing to do with that stupid nieces made and it was stupid and it was ridiculous. but they lie. they've been lying for years now. they get away with it and the press allows them to get away with it. >> steve: so you're very clear, there are people who are lying about it in the white house. but -- >> they knew they were lying. i mean, they were saying it with a very straight face and they knew they were lying and certainly after the first 24 hours, it became the big lie and they kept doing it and the press allowed them to get away where w it. >> gretchen: why were they lying? >> in order to save face. in order to s
. he wants to get past november 6th. cheryl: is susan rice going to make it past november? more talk about her being the next secretary of state. because of what has been supported by the administration did know that was a terrorist attack. >> she needs to explain that. my theory is she was told by the white house congratulations you have drawn the short straw and you are going on a sunday talk shows. otherwise i can't explain why hillary clinton was and they guessed that sunday. she is secretary of state and has the responsibility and yet she was completely invisible. cheryl: a big question here. if it wasn't susan rice as secretary of state who would be? >> i am not sure there are any good candidate in obama's administration but the next most likely candidate is john kerry of the senate foreign relations committee. obama knows him from his time in the senate. he thought he would get it before hillary and it is likely to be one of those two. cheryl: before i let you go, syria. the situation continues to head downhill. will we get any more involvement? the russians are very involved.
. >> here's my question, then. because congressman peter king is calling on susan rice to step down, to resign as u.s. ambassador to the u.n. and yesterday, here's the response as they try and move forward and turn the majpage. congressman paul ryan and paul mccain. take a look at this approach. >> the response was slow. it was confused. it was inconsistent. they first said that it was a youtube video and a spontaneous mob. we now know that it was a planned terrorist attack. if this was one tragic incident, that would be a tragedy in and of itself. the problem is it's part of a bigger picture of the fact that the obama foreign policy is unraveling literally before our eyes on our tv screens. >> i think it interferes with the depiction that the administration is trying to convey, that al qaeda is on the wane, that everything's fine in the middle east. >> you think it's political? >> i think there are certain political overtones. how else could you trot out our u.n. ambassador to say it was spontaneous? >> maybe it was. >> five days later? that doesn't pass the smell test. it was ever
senator john mccain and two of his gop colleagues fired off a tough letter to ambassador susan rice demanding to know why she gave different answers from other officials about whether or not this was a spontaneous attack, a terrorist attack. the bottom line, the white house is insisting this charge of a cover-up is not true. >> shep: if any of this is getting to the white house or any of his campaign team, you can't tell it. >> you can't tell from the president. he was calm in new york, even after he finished up his u.n. speech. he ran into a security guard whom he amendment so to recognize from a previous visit and they were joking about nfl football. take a listen. >> the president saying you're still rooting for the jets. by the way, they did not talk about that replacement ref issue there. but white house spokesman jay carney says the president did see some of the game. he's upset just like a lot of other americans about it. he wants to see the new refs -- the old refs come back and get the replacements out. >> shep: too bad he can't have a presidential decree. >> presidential o
stands beside the calls for susan rice to resign. member after the attack in benghazi that killed four americans ambassador rice called it spontaneous reaction to protests over anti-islamic film. fox news has since learned that u.s. intention officials had internally classified the incident as a terrorist attack within the first 24 hours. now the chairman of the house homeland security committee, the republic congressman peter king says ambassador rice delivered information that was, quote: either intentionally or unintentionally misleading and wrong. the senate majority leader harry reid fired back saying some lawmakers are just trying to score some cheap political points. catherine herridge with us live from d.c. tonight. catherine, you spoke to the republic chairman on the house republic committee how did he react. >> just a short time ago congressman mike rogers suggesting the obama administration politicized the intelligence in the immediate aftermath in the attack on the consulate in libya. spontaneous and not premeditated terrorism. >> i argue the administration made some serio
-qaeda-related group. and yet you heard the white house, the administration including ambassador susan rice saying, no, no, no, that's not it at all. now, listen f deception and -- if deception and lies and cover-up is proven, this thing could spiral out of control and really damage the president's prospects, couldn't it? >> well, if you can prove deception and cover-up and lies. i think it was more incompetent and failure to get their talking points straight. gregg: isn't that equally bad? >> i wouldn't say it's incompetence in terms of knowledge, i'd say it's in terms of language. gregg: incompetence in terms of ability to handle a crisis. >> well, listen, handling a crisis not in terms of the messaging, but in terms of how we address what happened in libya are two very different things. it remains to be seen -- gregg: the murder of four americans, the first time in 30 years. >> you and i agree. gregg: you've got anti-american -- >> you and i are not disagreeing on this topic. we fully agree that we need competence when it comes to policy, but it's very different when you're talking about one person
. that's now, norah. >> as you know libya -- what susan rice said on a number of shows over the weekend which you have criticized -- i read this morning. >> i was on after her. she said they had no evidence that it was not a spontaneous demonstration. how could you say that when mortars indirect, direct fire and heavy weapons are being used at this is as a result of a spontaneous demonstration? also incredible to blame it on a video. it's not the video. its the islamist using the video. >> do you believe that al qaeda is behind the attack. >> i think that this was an orchestrated attack. clearly the organization that was heavily involved is involved with extremist organizations. and so i can't say exactly but it's clear that there's a connection between these people and to say that it was a spontaneous demonstration is really beyond belief. it shows a fundamental pwarfare but of what's going on in that part of the world. >> you raise the issue how do you make these embassies more secure. we have to turn to politics. >> could i say its the obligation of the host country but our obligatio
Search Results 0 to 21 of about 22 (some duplicates have been removed)